According to Environment Minister Kai Mykkänen (kok), it is an “unsatisfactory situation” that there are surprises in the last stage of the legislative process.
The fate of the Nature Restoration Regulation is still open in the European Union.
The purpose of the regulation was to introduce binding obligations to improve the state of nature in different habitats. Measures should cover at least 20 percent of the EU’s land and sea areas by 2030 and all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050.
The restoration decree would concern, among other things, marshes, wetlands, meadows, waterways, forests, agricultural environments and cities.
Finland voted against the proposal last summer, when the Council of Member States formed its position on it. However, the regulation narrowly passed the council at the time.
A political agreement was reached on the content of the regulation in the tripartite negotiations between the Council of Member States, the European Parliament and the EU Commission in November. In them, the regulation was given various flexibilities.
When the council voted for the approval of the so-called trilogy negotiation result for the first time in November, Finland abstained from voting. The reason for the somewhat more positive position was the flexibilities that had been added to the regulation as a result of the negotiations.
However, abstaining from voting in EU qualified majority decisions is also considered a vote against.
The European Parliament gave its approval to the negotiation result of the regulation in February.
It seemed strongly that the restoration will be implemented in the member countries.
Hungary went to the evening milking
However, the situation has suddenly changed now in March. According to media reports, Hungary, which previously voted in favor of the regulation, has now changed its mind. It has dismantled the narrow majority behind the regulation.
Because of that, Belgium, the country holding the EU presidency, has not been able to take the regulation to its second and final vote. The president is still trying to find countries that could turn to support the regulation in order to get it through this legislative session.
The matter was discussed today at the meeting of EU environment ministers.
“For our part, I stated that Finland has acted consistently and long-term. Already two years ago, we have brought out our pressing critical considerations”, Minister of the Environment and Climate Kai Mykkänen (kok) stated after the meeting.
According to him, it is an “unsatisfactory situation” that we are in the middle of surprises in the last stage of the legislative process.
“In terms of the coherence and operational capability of EU decision-making, it should be possible to trust that when the trilogy agreement has been reached, it will be valid. This step should be nothing more than a formality. This has not happened now. That’s the surprising and exceptional situation here.”
After all the flexibilities in the restoration regulation, what is bothering Finland?
“It is especially related to the interpretation of the so-called impairment ban. To put it colloquially: what does the ban on weakening mean for how limited forestry is.”
According to Mykkänen, another problem is the level of obligations to restore widely occurring habitat types.